Thursday, May 28, 2009

The ‘Right’ to Marry Your Pet

First came traditional marriage. Then, gay marriage. Now, there's a movement combining both—simultaneously. Abby Ellin visits the next frontier of nuptials: the "triad."

Less than 18 months ago, Sasha Lessin and Janet Kira Lessin gathered before their friends near their home in Maui, and proclaimed their love for one another. Nothing unusual about that—Sasha, 68, and Janet, 55—were legally married in 2000. Rather, this public commitment ceremony was designed to also bind them to Shivaya, their new 60-something "husband." Says Sasha: “I want to walk down the street hand in hand in hand in hand and live together openly and proclaim our relationship.”

Kent comments:

Charles Colson recently complained that:

In a saner, more sensible time, antics like those of the Lessins would be shocking. But in case you haven’t noticed, we are not living in sensible times. The acceptance of same-sex “marriage” has been made possible by a profound shift in our understanding of marriage. We no longer see marriage as an institution defined by someone and something other than the couple, like tradition, religion and even biology.

Instead, marriage is the product of the couple’s understanding of their relationship. It’s the product of certain feelings and willingness to make a public commitment to another person. If these are present, the reasoning goes, denying people the right to marry because they “happen” to be of the same sex is arbitrary and unjust. [read it all here]

That’s not the half of it, however. Here are some predictions.

First, these same ideas will be used by some to urge the acceptance of adult-child ‘marriages’ – and by ‘child’ I don’t mean just teenagers. But this one will be a hard-sell. The ‘prejudices’ against it are still rather strong. For one thing, the education establishment has not yet decided to endorse this perversion as it has same-sex ‘marriage.’ (Could this be because it might tend to take away some of the ‘clients’ of the education establishment? Just guessing here.)

Second, it will not be long before some pervert decides to ‘marry’ his pet. I’m not sure yet how opinion will go on this one, but I am predicting that a small, vocal group will soon start to push for legal recognition of human-animal ‘marriage.’

Don’t start saying this is somehow ‘revolting.’ It is no more revolting that homosexual ‘marriage’ – be that of the two, there, or more varieties. Even now most people have been brow-beaten into openly expressing any contempt to homosexual ‘marriage.’ With the right collaboration of popular media outlets, the educational establishment, and left-leaning church groups, it could easily become just as acceptable as homosexual ‘marriage.’

All the reasons given for homosexual marriage are just as applicable to human-animal marriage.

(Fido, if you take this woman to be your lawfully-wedded wife, bark once to signify ‘I do.’)